So are we omitting where Landry said, "I think (Ryan) Tannehill's skill level and the way he was playing the year we went to the playoffs before his injury was at a high level and he could have taken us to a championship or whatever or whatnot, but it didn't happen..."

Watch the videos of Landry, Parker, Drake, Stills and Sims stopping to adjust routes to get poorly thrown passes, then break tackles to bust forward for more yards.

Then watch Tannehill delivering short throws IN FRONT OF THE RECEIVER where they take the ball up field. Tannehill benefits just as much as anyone on Landry, Stills and his backs getting YAC. But its a little thing called ball placement and anticipation, not lobbing throws thinking you're a gunslinger with a pea shooter arm.

But hey, must be that crazy cameraman editing the video footage to pump up 17's reputation. Its everyone else, even behind the camera!

Yes, I know, its best to let adults talk and the rest become white noise.

I don't keep going because I somehow think he'll change his tune, nor do I think I'm necessarily proving him wrong. Okay, well a little bit of the last one is true.

I just know there is stuff out there to help everyone here form their own opinions and engage in fun discussion, even if there is a disagreement. Imagine if all I ever said was "watch the Pittsburgh, SD and SF games that year. Proves Tannehill is elite! Just look at the numbers, better than (insert superior QBs name) numbers against the same team!"

Watch the Youtube videos. Titled "Every Tannehill Dropback (with game/week)", "Every Moore Dropback", heck they even have it for Cutler and Fales.

You get to see so much more, the protection, receiver routes, pocket awareness/lack thereof...really helps put things in perspective.

I understand that elite QBs do not grow on trees. In the last 10 drafts only Russell Wilson and Matt Ryan have risen to a level where I would say they are Hall of Famers. Some good QBs and plenty of mediocre ones. Its not easy to find "THE GUY". But Miami has to start trying.

I think what kills us is that we could have drafted both Matt Ryan and Aaron Rogers. I will be the first to say that I thought Rogers was going to be another Tedford failure in the NFL as that has been the track record for Tedford QBs. Also, I'd like to say that before the draft, I said that we should draft both Tannehill at pick 8, and Russell Wilson at pick 8 in the 3rd round. I saw Wilson up close here at NC State, so, I knew he would be good ... but I didn't know he'd be great in the NFL.

Tannehill still has upside, and I think he can take the next step if he gets to the confidence level of elite quarterbacks. He was always taught to make the safe pass until Gase to him to sling it. He needs to feel that he can carry the team, and I find that quality missing from him.

Tannehill still has upside, and I think he can take the next step if he gets to the confidence level of elite quarterbacks. He was always taught to make the safe pass until Gase to him to sling it. He needs to feel that he can carry the team, and I find that quality missing from him.

I don't think he can carry a team. He'll play his butt off, make some great throws and probably get you to the playoffs with a decent supporting cast. Unfortunately, I think the next and peak step for him is being a top 10ish QB.

Opinions vary but I think we can all reasonably agree that in some order the elite QBs are Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger and Wilson. Rivers was there but I now put him in the next group of Ryan, Newton and Stafford. Then it gets really mixed up. Young guys like Prescott and Wentz are probably there, but it is still early (big drop off from Prescott last year). Same with Derek Carr and Kirk Cousins aka they show an IT factor sometimes but something is missing. I don't see Tannehill getting beyond that 3rd level where you can comfortably call him a good starter but never see him as an annual threat to win a Super Bowl.

Most of these guys need lightning in a bottle years (or late season stretch) with a great defense to win a championship (see Joe Flacco in 2012).

I don't see Tannehill getting beyond that 3rd level where you can comfortably call him a good starter but never see him as an annual threat to win a Super Bowl.

Most of these guys need lightning in a bottle years (or late season stretch) with a great defense to win a championship (see Joe Flacco in 2012).

And that is pretty much where Tannehill is right now .... in that 3rd level. It's a heart and mind thing, and I hate to say that because Tanny gives 100% of what he has, but until he gets the confidence that he can carry a team instead of being part of the team, we won't see it. He shouldn't have to worry as much about protection this year, so, let's hope the light comes on. I saw Rich Gannon develop it later in his career. It can happen. I think this year should give us an idea if he can become a 1st or 2nd tier quarterback.

[quote="Big Dave"]And that is pretty much where Tannehill is right now .... in that 3rd level./quote]

Eh, not consistently at least. He kind of drifts back and forth between that level and the next one down (although I'd say that 3rd level is a rather large, interchangeable group).

He was definitely there pre-injury and maybe that is what we get back.

What I don't like and keep reading about these OTAs is that he is back to feeding a safety net - Danny Amendola. Probably should not read too much into yet, but I was hoping he'd be more aggressive with Stills' speed and Parker's size. We'll see.

I don't see Tannehill getting beyond that 3rd level where you can comfortably call him a good starter but never see him as an annual threat to win a Super Bowl.

Most of these guys need lightning in a bottle years (or late season stretch) with a great defense to win a championship (see Joe Flacco in 2012).

And that is pretty much where Tannehill is right now .... in that 3rd level. It's a heart and mind thing, and I hate to say that because Tanny gives 100% of what he has, but until he gets the confidence that he can carry a team instead of being part of the team, we won't see it. He shouldn't have to worry as much about protection this year, so, let's hope the light comes on. I saw Rich Gannon develop it later in his career. It can happen. I think this year should give us an idea if he can become a 1st or 2nd tier quarterback.

Agree with that except for giving it his all....I still say his preparation is lacking and it shows on the field..

His biggest issues are slow reads and picking up blitzers..Been around too long for that...He beats up on a bad 49er team one week and gets killed by a tough Raven team a week later.

I'm not asking this as a knock or to pick a fight, but what draws you to this conclusion? I'm not a fly on the wall down there. But all accounts from reporters, coaches and players, he's the first one in and last one out at practice. Reports (as quoted in this thread) and photo evidence show he has done more than coach practice to work with his receivers. Is it the Landry comments?

And the other reason I ask is because your comments on slow read and blitz pick up (which are accurate). Some guys try really hard and study their butts off, but don't have that natural trigger to beat this and reach a Pro Bowl level. That seems to be the problem more than preparation, at least in my opinion.

And the other reason I ask is because your comments on slow read and blitz pick up (which are accurate). Some guys try really hard and study their butts off, but don't have that natural trigger to beat this and reach a Pro Bowl level. That seems to be the problem more than preparation, at least in my opinion.

I agree with that as well. He works hard, studies film deligently, listens to the coaches ... and for this Gase loves the guy. If he had better pass protection we could surely say, "Yep, he doesn't have it and may never have it." I hate to even mention offensive line because it makes the Tanny-haters freak out. One way or the other, we will have our answer on Tannehill this year.

As you've read, Landry is at it again. The dude needs to stop letting the press feed this monster. His comments gives us insight into the attitude problems Gase had with him.

Barry Jackson wrote:

Memo to Jarvis Landry: You really should resist any inclination to talk about Ryan Tannehill. We know you don’t think he’s as good as the quarterbacks you have now in Cleveland (Tyrod Taylor, Baker Mayfield). We know you wish he — and the coaches — would have thrown you more deep balls.

But Landry’s mild belittling of Tannehill isn’t merely unnecessary, it’s unbecoming. Landry assuredly would flip if Tannehill made similar comments about him.

So should we draw any grand conclusions from this, that Tannehill is disliked or isn’t a good leader?

Absolutely not.

Both publicly and privately, teammates in recent weeks have gone out of their way to rave about Tannehill — some solicited but some unsolicited, too.

I know of at least one offensive player on the team that Tannehill has made a point to text this offseason, to offer encouragement and make sure he’s working on his game.

Multiple teammates have said Tannehill called players to organize informal throwing sessions before the offseason program — contradicting Landry’s claim that Tannehill didn't do that.

Tannehill had made a point to evolve as a teammate and leader. One example: He moves around the lunchroom, sitting with different teammates to establish a relationship.

T.J. McDonald made this unprompted comment about Tannehill last month, which was telling considering he plays on defense: “His leadership is what I think we missed the most."

And guard Jesse Davis said this: “He’s a helluva worker. I didn’t think I’ve ever not seen him in the building somewhere when I’ve been in here. He’s always doing something — rehabbing, getting extra, coming up to us with something like, ‘Hey, we’re going to try this today,' or ‘We might try that.’ It’s awesome what he does. He’s been a great leader, gets us all together, get us on the same page.”

I would like to apologize to Dave and his mods. I failed in what I thought would be an attempt to point out absurdity by being absurd. In this thread I may have caused some to question this sites mods and possibly Dave's judgment. I was wrong and want to clear up any possible missunderstanding. Dave and his mods have only treated me fairly and kindly in our interactions. I apologize again for any confusion my posts caused.

I would like to apologize to Dave and his mods. I failed in what I thought would be an attempt to point out absurdity by being absurd. In this thread I may have caused some to question this sites mods and possibly Dave's judgment. I was wrong and want to clear up any possible missunderstanding. Dave and his mods have only treated me fairly and kindly in our interactions. I apologize again for any confusion my posts caused.